I'm looking for a smaller Slingshot front wing for the days where my Infinity 84 is a bit big (18 knots+ and/or big chop). Available options are another Infinity 76, or a Gamma 68, or Warp Speed 65. I already have the FWind1, but is seems quite inferior to the Infinities. The new Infinity 65 is not yet available.

I'd love to hear from anyone who has foiled both the 76 and the 68 or 65. I don't think top speed is an issue, any of the smaller wings will be faster than the i84 and plenty fast for my current skill level.

Select to expand quote

boardsurfr said..
I'm looking for a smaller Slingshot front wing for the days where my Infinity 84 is a bit big (18 knots+ and/or big chop). Available options are another Infinity 76, or a Gamma 68, or Warp Speed 65. I already have the FWind1, but is seems quite inferior to the Infinities. The new Infinity 65 is not yet available.

I'd love to hear from anyone who has foiled both the 76 and the 68 or 65. I don't think top speed is an issue, any of the smaller wings will be faster than the i84 and plenty fast for my current skill level.

Curious what wind range your using your i84 in, and sail sizes?

Select to expand quote

boardsurfr said..
I'm looking for a smaller Slingshot front wing for the days where my Infinity 84 is a bit big (18 knots+ and/or big chop). Available options are another Infinity 76, or a Gamma 68, or Warp Speed 65. I already have the FWind1, but is seems quite inferior to the Infinities. The new Infinity 65 is not yet available.

I'd love to hear from anyone who has foiled both the 76 and the 68 or 65. I don't think top speed is an issue, any of the smaller wings will be faster than the i84 and plenty fast for my current skill level.Infinity 76 or TimeCode 68 if you can still get one.

It depends a little on your weight.

Infinity 76 or TimeCode 68, if you can still get one.
Both are awesome wings - I use the Infinity in 12-25 kn, the TC in 18-30+ Both wings turn super fast
I'm 81kgs.

If the conditions are full-on (big chop/swells) I prefer the TC - crank hard turns and accelerate down swells a little more securely than the Infinity.
Both wings go about 21 knots - which seems plenty fast enough when carving and riding chop/swells, not going fast in a straight line.
The Warp 65 will be faster so if you're foiling mainly flat water that could be fun.


The TimeCode 68 (H1) is quite different to the Gamma 68 (H2).

I have the Time code 68 to compliment my I84. Use my TC from 18-20 mph on a 5.0 and my I84 up to 22 mph with a 4.0 so a good crossover range. TC feel silky and its top end is beyond my ability at the moment.

106kgs on 142 litre board

I wonder why they dropped the time code 68 for 2020? There must be something better in the lineup because they dropped it.

What could it be? Infinity 65 or Apollo 60?

I'd like to add a smaller wing to go with my Infinity 76.

The small area of the Infinity 65 has me concerned the gap is too big. Apollo maybe a better gap?

All great wings! I was using the i84 so much (even on a 4.5 up to 25 knots) that I forgot about the i76, but just lately I have been using the i76 a lot more. The i76 I find goes upwind much quicker and its great for turning in super strong puffs (17-25 knots).

Anything in the over 25 knots, I use the TC 68 and its a very stable foil, I have never lost control using it (I use B position on wizard 125).
I actually cracked my first foil duck gybe on the TC 68 as it foils out of the turn fast and smooth.

From the reports that I have read the new i65 looks to be a winner as well, much like the TC 68, nice smooth turns and plenty of pop if needed for air time? the i65 has a flatter profile, so should go as quick as you can hold on!

Pic is the TC 68 with 42 rear in B. That day was really gusty over 35 knots and it was no problem at all.

i65 in full flight

Thanks for all the feedback. I got a bit confused with all the different names for the older foils. Looks like I have the H2 = Gamma 68. I tried it only twice. It's better than the i84 in regards to reacting less to under-water currents from chop, but not as great for the shorter masts I sometimes need to use since it spins out earlier and breaches are more abrupt.

Select to expand quote

CoreAS said..
All great wings! I was using the i84 so much (even on a 4.5 up to 25 knots) that I forgot about the i76, but just lately I have been using the i76 a lot more. The i76 I find goes upwind much quicker and its great for turning in super strong puffs (17-25 knots).

Great to hear that. My wife on the i76 always goes better upwind than I on the i84. Now I can say it's the foil, not the foiler

Select to expand quote

CoreAS said..
Anything in the over 25 knots, I use the TC 68 and its a very stable foil, I have never lost control using it (I use B position on wizard 125).
I actually cracked my first foil duck gybe on the TC 68 as it foils out of the turn fast and smooth.

From the reports that I have read the new i65 looks to be a winner as well, much like the TC 68, nice smooth turns and plenty of pop if needed for air time? the i65 has a flatter profile, so should go as quick as you can hold on!

Pic is the TC 68 with 42 rear in B. That day was really gusty over 35 knots and it was no problem at all.

Great info, thanks. I'll probably try to get a TC 68, it's about 1/2 price of the i65. I also like the larger surface area a bit better (1101 cm^2 vs. 841 for the i65, 2066 for the i84, and 960 for the Gamma 68). I think cutting the square area almost in half is a big enough change.

The word from all the Slingshot team guys and development team at the HQ, is that the new Infinity 65cm, is 'the holy grail' :), for the small wings.

Boardsurffr: it might be worth to hold out for the 65cm. They are in stock early October.

Im sure the 76 + 65 Infinity combo will cover it for most foilers.
84cm is still a great choice for extreme light condition, or heavier foilers using larger sails.

I would still point point out that the 76cm set up, will take you a looooong way, to cover most conditions.

From what I hear there is no gap between 76 and 65, but more like a nice 'overlapping'. 76 as mentioned, can still be controlled in stronger wind, and the 65 will go in less wind, that you'll expect.

Cheers
jesper

I expect the 65 to be significantly better than the TC 68. I would not be surprised if it matches or exceeds the low end of the 68, even though it has a lot less area. It would be the logical addition to our 76 + 84. BUT I get to use the 76 only when the stars align in a certain, but unspecified, way. Part of the problem is that our winds tend to be iffy. There's been a few days where we used both the slapper and the foil with the same sail, being nicely powered on each. On such days, the 76 is reserved for my wife. Maybe at some point in the future, she'll try a smaller foil, and decide she likes it. Then she might let me use the 76. Or maybe that day will never come.

I'm sure I'd be perfectly happy with a 76 in just about any condition where I want to foil right now. But adding a second 76 just does not seem right. On sails and board sizes, we are (almost) always 1-2 sizes apart. Going from the 84 straight to the 65 seems like a big jump - probably too big. Add to all that the list price difference ($249 vs. $543 US), and it's the TC 68 that I ordered. There's a (small) chance that we get to try the i65 even before the TC 68 arrives, and discover that a "3 Infinity" setup would have been perfect, but at the price of a good G10 fin, that's a risk I can live with.

Select to expand quote

boardsurfr said..
I expect the 65 to be significantly better than the TC 68. I would not be surprised if it matches or exceeds the low end of the 68, even though it has a lot less area. It would be the logical addition to our 76 + 84. BUT I get to use the 76 only when the stars align in a certain, but unspecified, way. Part of the problem is that our winds tend to be iffy. There's been a few days where we used both the slapper and the foil with the same sail, being nicely powered on each. On such days, the 76 is reserved for my wife. Maybe at some point in the future, she'll try a smaller foil, and decide she likes it. Then she might let me use the 76. Or maybe that day will never come.

I'm sure I'd be perfectly happy with a 76 in just about any condition where I want to foil right now. But adding a second 76 just does not seem right. On sails and board sizes, we are (almost) always 1-2 sizes apart. Going from the 84 straight to the 65 seems like a big jump - probably too big. Add to all that the list price difference ($249 vs. $543 US), and it's the TC 68 that I ordered. There's a (small) chance that we get to try the i65 even before the TC 68 arrives, and discover that a "3 Infinity" setup would have been perfect, but at the price of a good G10 fin, that's a risk I can live with.

Good move - I'm sure that the Infinity 65 will be awesome, I can't wait for mine to arrive. I reckon it will be fast and turny.

But the TimeCode 68 is also an awesome wing - super smooth, controllable in the turns

I have i84, i76, i65 and Warpspeed 65. Never tried the timecode 68

The range of the 76 is insane and it should be the go to wing for most riders, except those heavier folks or those who foil in the lightest of winds.

The warpspeed is exhilarating, but faster than I really want to go on a foil. Also you basically need to be at planing speed before it will foil, but it was a good option for foiling on days when I should have been windsurfing on small gear. The warpspeed is not so great at staying on the foil during lulls too.

I recently got the i65 and it will likely replace the warpspeed 65 as my highwind foil, as it foils a little earlier, and handles the lulls better. It doesn't go as fast of course but maybe that is a good thing. I do not expect the i65 to replace the i76 (my current go to foil).

Thanks for the suggestions to get a Time Code 68. I just had a couple of windier sessions where the i84 was a bit too much, while the TC68 was just perfect. Today was one of them, where I tested a Fanatic Blast 145 for foiling. With the i84, I crashed every couple of minutes, mostly after nose dives and breaches. Part of the issue was that I was overpowered (I later planed on a fin on the same board without problems). But when I switched to the TC 68, everything was just perfectly easy to control. I even accidentally improved my foil PB for the nautical mile by a couple of knots .

That made me wonder if there is a relation between the wingspan of the foil and the "ideal" board width. Intuitively, it seems that the widths should be similar, with control issues cropping up if the foil is significantly wider than the board. Any thoughts on that?

I recently got the warp 65, it sits along side my infinity 76 and 84. The 76 has a huge range and is comfortable even in 25knts. The warp65 for me is to use in 20knts plus when i want to go fast. It definatley needs to be going quick to get on foil bit when it does its amazing. The turns and gybes you can do are so fast its like gybing on rails.

Select to expand quote

boardsurfr said..
Thanks for the suggestions to get a Time Code 68. I just had a couple of windier sessions where the i84 was a bit too much, while the TC68 was just perfect. Today was one of them, where I tested a Fanatic Blast 145 for foiling. With the i84, I crashed every couple of minutes, mostly after nose dives and breaches. Part of the issue was that I was overpowered (I later planed on a fin on the same board without problems). But when I switched to the TC 68, everything was just perfectly easy to control. I even accidentally improved my foil PB for the nautical mile by a couple of knots .

That made me wonder if there is a relation between the wingspan of the foil and the "ideal" board width. Intuitively, it seems that the widths should be similar, with control issues cropping up if the foil is significantly wider than the board. Any thoughts on that?

I've not heard of any problems with anyone using the 121cm wide Horue xxlw on 75-80cm boards. I've used it on a 78 and it seemed fine.

I think it much more likely that by reducing your wing area from 2000 to 1100 when well powered up went a long way to reducing your excessive lift problems.

I think required board width needs much more study in general. For instance a common statement is that tail width is needed to create leverage over the foil. Another common statement is that with larger sails you need more tail width. Is the width needed for the foil or the sail? Further, what sail attributes effect this balance? How does sail aspect ratio, location of the sails draft, and foil design all contribute the required tail width. My gut tells me it is related to the down force created by the sail. I am searching for the sweet spot in freeride gear where the smallest kit both in size and quantity covers 5-35 knots. This probably deserves a new thread.

Anyone here have any experience with the Apollo wing. The kite boarders seem to love it. Might prove to be a really good foil for windsurf foiling.

Select to expand quote

utcminusfour said..
I think required board width needs much more study in general. For instance a common statement is that tail width is needed to create leverage over the foil. Another common statement is that with larger sails you need more tail width. Is the width needed for the foil or the sail? Further, what sail attributes effect this balance? How does sail aspect ratio, location of the sails draft, and foil design all contribute the required tail width. My gut tells me it is related to the down force created by the sail. I am searching for the sweet spot in freeride gear where the smallest kit both in size and quantity covers 5-35 knots. This probably deserves a new thread.

This addresses the longitudinal forces including the thrust generated by the sail. I don't have a picture for the lateral forces in your question.
I just found this. Hope it helps!





These both come from the Maui Ultra fins website.

mauiultrafins.com/technology-2/hydrofoil-mechanics/

Select to expand quote

utcminusfour said..
I think required board width needs much more study in general. For instance a common statement is that tail width is needed to create leverage over the foil. Another common statement is that with larger sails you need more tail width. Is the width needed for the foil or the sail? Further, what sail attributes effect this balance? How does sail aspect ratio, location of the sails draft, and foil design all contribute the required tail width. My gut tells me it is related to the down force created by the sail. I am searching for the sweet spot in freeride gear where the smallest kit both in size and quantity covers 5-35 knots. This probably deserves a new thread.

I was hoping one of the more experienced racers would chime in...

Width, imho, is more related to where the apparent wind is and what you are trying to do with the foil (and what it's trying to do to you ).

Short version: board width is much more related to how far forward the apparent wind is and how much side force on the foil mast you are trying to generate. This is very dependent on what points of sail you are trying to optimize for. The easiest way to see this is upwind/downwind racing boards sailed out on the rail going upwind and can easily be sailed with the back foot inboard downwind (chicken straps). Freeride boards don't worry about this because they aren't worried about the last 5-10 degrees of upwind performance. Also, see the Patrik video where he talks about the 2020 lineup. The Foil Slalom boards have more pinched tails because they aren't required to go upwind.

Ditto on the leverage issue. It's in forward apparent wind scenarios where the foil mast has the most side force on it that width helps you counter. Also, if you are trying to heel the entire board/rig over to windward, the further you are out on the rail and the wider that rail is, the easier it is.

In terms of studies, we have empirical testing. Wider boards (100cm) seem to go windward better than narrower boards (91cm) as seen at the Formula Worlds. Similarly, in slalom situations, board width doesn't seem to be a primary factor.

Sail weight/downforce is trimmed fore/aft with mast base/foot strap/foot position. Easiest way to see is in light wind going windward, a lot of racers will put the back foot in front of the back strap since there's less sail downforce - but it's still on the rail.

For the moment, I'm ignoring practical considerations such as how do I cram in 150-170 l for the bigger guys in something that's only 225cm long and not make it too thick. If I make the board wider, it's easier - plus the added benefit that the board is more stable. But that's a different design consideration.

I really like the diagrams. Couple things to make it perfect and something we can all keep in our physics toolboxes.

Figure 9 is missing a couple vectors. The front wing not only lifts everything, but it also acts as a fulcrum. Downforce LT has to be balanced out by an upforce directly under the sail mast base; call it UT. The W vector shown is only for the rider. There is also a weight vector from the board and sail/mast/boom pressing down on the mast base; call this one W2. W2 is balanced by the up vector UT.

Then, consistent with this is that CG is further forward, between the L and UT vectors. Since UT is much smaller than L, the CG is usually very close to the sail mast base.

Figure 14 applies to fins, but not to foils. In my experience on the water, there is very little side force on the foil mast when in flight. Instead, the force to counter the sail's side force FK is created by a tilt in the front wing at L x sin?. Watch all the videos. Nobody foils with a level board. Even when going dead abeam the board has 10-20 degrees of upwind tilt. When the racers foil upwind, their boards have a good 30-40 degrees of upwind tilt. It's the front wing doing all the sideforce work.

Select to expand quote

segler said..
Figure 14 applies to fins, but not to foils.

Respectfully disagree. Certainly it applies to foils. Perhaps the drawing exaggerates it but otherwise, none of us could reach much less go upwind. Yes, the PWA guy's and gals heel windward but most rec foilers don't. Even if you heeled over 30 degrees, that means the mast is still 60 degrees exposed. Given the size of a racing mast (roughly 1500cm2 or more), that's still a significant area.

Think about it - going upwind, the sail produces some component of side force. How much? I don't know the maths but at least enough to keep 70-100kg of meat hanging from the harness lines. What converts all that side force to forward motion? The underwater surfaces and at less than 45 degrees of heel, that's primarily going to be the foil mast. Does the wing help heeled over? Of course somewhat, but the heel component is typically much less than that. Most of us go upwind pretty close to flat.

Bunch of national level foilers: (Downunder Pro Photo thread)


Pro foilers at IFCA Worlds. Mind that most of those 95-110 masts are under water doing something.

I don't see any flat boards in those pictures. They are all heeled to windward.

In my old formula days, to fly upwind we used to stand way out on the rail and heel the board to leeward. This bent the 70 cm fin a little bit underneath the board to get a mild foiling effect. This lifted the board out of the water a little, and resulted in A LOT more speed upwind. This is the reason why formula racers were all gaga about really soft fins.

So, for foil racing, again on really wide boards, yes, standing way out there on the rail lets the rider leverage the rocking force of the foil mast. And, yes, in this way, there might be some "fin" action exerted by the foil mast.

But again, every single one of those racers has his/her board heeled to windward. They are using their front wings to provide the upwind climb angles.

To see this in even stronger light, check out the kitefoilers who are using ram-air kites on strapless boards with foils with REALLY long masts. They heel those puppies a full 45 degrees and can climb upwind like crazy. It's the front wing doing all the upwind work. On a light day at the Event Site last summer, I watched 8 of those guys out there practicing their upwind/downwind.

For freeride foiling, we don't need to climb upwind at crazy angles and speeds. Most of our foiling is abeam. Even abeam, I have yet to see a completely level board out there. Foilers are not using their masts as fins.

Select to expand quote

segler said..
I don't see any flat boards in those pictures. They are all heeled to windward.

In my old formula days, to fly upwind we used to stand way out on the rail and heel the board to leeward. This bent the 70 cm fin a little bit underneath the board to get a mild foiling effect. This lifted the board out of the water a little, and resulted in A LOT more speed upwind. This is the reason why formula racers were all gaga about really soft fins.

So, for foil racing, again on really wide boards, yes, standing way out there on the rail lets the rider leverage the rocking force of the foil mast. And, yes, in this way, there might be some "fin" action exerted by the foil mast.

But again, every single one of those racers has his/her board heeled to windward. They are using their front wings to provide the upwind climb angles.

To see this in even stronger light, check out the kitefoilers who are using ram-air kites on strapless boards with foils with REALLY long masts. They heel those puppies a full 45 degrees and can climb upwind like crazy. It's the front wing doing all the upwind work. On a light day at the Event Site last summer, I watched 8 of those guys out there practicing their upwind/downwind.

For freeride foiling, we don't need to climb upwind at crazy angles and speeds. Most of our foiling is abeam. Even abeam, I have yet to see a completely level board out there. Foilers are not using their masts as fins.

Someone a ton better than me has said the following here:

"To maximise power:
1. I Don't see how banking would help. I see banking as more of a result than a goal. Banking reduces power in the sail too.. Look at vids from the dutch olympic team in new zealand, in 6kts they fly their boards completely flat for max power! Those vids you see on fb and instgram of the PWA riders flying upwind are often powered up (14-15kts) with 9.0's or 10m sails!"

"Expanding a little regarding technique, look at the really fast WF racers like Kiran Badloe, Luuc van Opzeeland or the Goyard brothers! Independent of wind conditions they ride their board fairly high up, with the board being reasonably level! When I last sailed with Kiran it was gusting over 20 and we were out with 9.0's. He told me I had to sail my board way flatter and instead of using that for leverage should extend my upperbody way farther from my sail and stiffen up, being a straight plank from head to toe. That would allow me to "swivel" the board into a higher upwind angle. I tried, and it cost me a lot of strength but really works like a madman. When you ride your board flatter you also ride naturally a little higher, thus faster, and the upwind angle is insane if you put your preassure in the right place. If you tilt your board a lot you have a lot of preassure going into the tilting, while the preassure could go into upwind angle instead."

I, too, had a formula pre-windfoil. Those soft fins helped the board by developing a vertical moment much like a raceboard centerrboard planing. Kitefoils are a completely different animal as the foil angle and kite angle are completely independent unlike us.

I have tried really hard, many times, to point upwind with a dead-flat board by simply pointing upwind and letting the mast (strut) act as a giant fin. This works for slogging speeds prior to flight, but it absolutely does not work when up in flight.

When I try this flat-board upwind turn in flight, it simply does not turn upwind. It continues to track strongly in the initial direction. The mast keeps its airfoil section flying through the water at basically zero angle of attack. When I look down behind the board, there is no asymmetric tearing or turbulence or splashing of water off the mast. It never changes from completely symmetric flow. In fact, when I really push it, all the happens is that the mast stalls.

On the other hand, all I have to to is heel the board a little to windward to get things to turn upwind. So, while heeled, the mast is still flying at zero angle of attack, and the tilted wing is now providing some upwind lift whose force is the sine of the heel angle.

I invited all foilers to try this same experiment. Try turning a deal-flat board to windward while in flight. Doesn't work.

Figure 9 above still needs to have vectors UT and W2, and the CG still needs to be moved forward toward the mast base.

Select to expand quote

segler said..
I have tried really hard, many times, to point upwind with a dead-flat board by simply pointing upwind and letting the mast (strut) act as a giant fin. This works for slogging speeds prior to flight, but it absolutely does not work when up in flight.

When I try this flat-board upwind turn in flight, it simply does not turn upwind. It continues to track strongly in the initial direction. The mast keeps its airfoil section flying through the water at basically zero angle of attack. When I look down behind the board, there is no asymmetric tearing or turbulence or splashing of water off the mast. It never changes from completely symmetric flow. In fact, when I really push it, all the happens is that the mast stalls.

On the other hand, all I have to to is heel the board a little to windward to get things to turn upwind. So, while heeled, the mast is still flying at zero angle of attack, and the tilted wing is now providing some upwind lift whose force is the sine of the heel angle.

I invited all foilers to try this same experiment. Try turning a deal-flat board to windward while in flight. Doesn't work.

Figure 9 above still needs to have vectors UT and W2, and the CG still needs to be moved forward toward the mast base.

I noticed my upwind technique today and I came to the following conclusion: to turn further in to the wind from my current course I would rail the board over ~20?, but once I achieved the new course (angle into the wind) I would reduce the railing angle to about 5 degrees to maintain the course. Kind of like turning the handle bars on a bike. There was an aft raking of the sail too.

I didn't pay attention to the angle of the board when on a beam reach, I suspect it is slightly to windward as well

Inboard straps, infinity 76